[NFB-Talk] Equality vs undue burden

[kaye Zimpher]

Generally, I have to say, that I really don’t care about undue burden. If I as a disabled person have a right to a good or service just as anyone else would, then I expect that to be given to me. There are sometimes however, when judgment and common sense do have to come into play. I do think it is our responsibility to make sure that we use that common sense when needed. As you mentioned, is it possibly safer, or does it make more sense for an able-bodied person to do the roofing job? Perhaps it does. But what if the able-bodied person had never had any roofing experience at all, whatsoever. What if, the person in the wheelchair, was a roofer before his accident, and he was at the top of his class or game before he somehow became hurt. What if that person who is able-bodied, was able to get up on the roof, and may be because of some thing unknown about that person, they had balance issues, slipped and fell, or otherwise hindered the company by doing such a poor job, that the customer then had to solicit the assistance of yet a second company, costing even more money. There are so many unknowns. All we can do, is pretty much, the best we can. We have to use common sense and our own judgment, but typically, and as always, this is only my opinion, I tend to look at things from a law perspective. If I am supposed to have it, then give it to me. If I am not supposed to have it, and I am just whining about it because I want it, then don’t try so hard to give it to me.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 5, 2022, at 3:26 PM, Jack Heim via nFB-Talk <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
> In this month's Braille Monitor, there is an article by George Stern about striving for equality. Not to criticize the article at all, it is really good as far as it goes. I have a little problem in that there is an obvious answer to one of the main points George brings up. I see people struggling with this same issue all the time in all kinds of ways.
> 
> 
> In the article, George mentions a friend who says equality for blind people is an impossibility. The example George gives is his friend saying, "A wheelchair user and an able-bodied person apply for the same roofing job. Which one do you expect the contractor to hire?"
> 
> 
> What George and his friend are doing here, without even realizing it, is struggling with the concept of an undue burden. Of course a roofing company is going to hire the able-bodied person because (presumably) hiring the person in the wheel chair would be an undue burden. If, on the other hand, the person in the wheel chair could do the job with some kind of lif system so that it would not be an undue burden to hire him, then the roofing company should treat the applicants equally.
> 
> 
> I am not expressing a legal argument here although I believe this concept is actually legally binding in some circumstances. This is an ethical point I am making. I see people debating the ethics of disability rights all the time. They do this dance around the concept of an undue burden without seeming to recognize it.
> 
> 
> Ethically, as a disabled person, you have a right to be treated like everybody else unless it would place an undue burden on somebody else. The debate should never be on whether you have a right to an accommodation but rather on whether  you are asking for something that constitutes an undue burden. You want to bring your guide dog on an airplane? Does that place an undue burden on the airline? You want your text books in braille? Does that place an undue burden on the school?
> 
> 
> If you just keep this concept in mind, most debates over disability rights can be resolved fairly easily.
> 
> 
> ###
> 
> Jack Heim, john at johnheim.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nFB-Talk mailing list
> nFB-Talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nFB-Talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org/kaye.j.zimpher%40gmail.com